By now, whenever the subject of XMRV raises its sleepy head, the reaction is somewhere between a yawn and a primal scream. Well, its time to examine some more data, this time by way of two studies published online in "Science".

In the study from the Wisconsin Virus Research Group, researchers attempted to replicate the results in the 2009 Lombardi study that found XMRV in 67% of patients with chronic fatigue syndrome, versus 3.7% of control patients. To this end, blood samples were examined from 61 patients with chronic fatigue syndrome from the same medical practice that had supplied samples in the original study; this group included 43 patients who had been earlier diagnosed as being XMRV-positive. The analysis of these samples, as presented in this latest "Science" article, revealed no viral genetic material, no infectious virus, and no virus-specific antibody evidence of XMRV in any of these samples.

Likewise, there was no evidence of other murine-like gammaretroviruses (MLVs), per investigators at the University of California, San Francisco. Scientists used the most sensitive assays available. The group in San Francisco had been asked by Dr. Peterson, a co-author of the Lombardi paper, to examine some blood samples from that 2009 study after several other groups had failed to replicate the positive findings published in 2009.

Interestingly, the "Wall Street Journal" reported that "Science" asked for the retraction of the Lombardi paper. However, Judy Mikovits, the director of research of the Institute involved in the 2009 work, has labeled talk of retraction as being premature.

The editor-in-chief of "Science" presented an "Expression of Editorial Concern" regarding the Lombardi study, and a statement of such concern has been retroactively attached to the Lombardi paper.

In the second study, XMRV DNA sequences were detected in commercial laboratory reagents. It was concluded that "evidence linking XMRV and ... chronic fatigue syndrome is likely attributable to laboratory contamination". Human cell lines that produce XMRV were studied and the authors "conclude that XMRV... was generated by recombination of two proviruses" and that "the association of XMRV with human disease is due to contamination of human samples with virus originating from this recombination event".

In a press statement, Dr. Pathak of the National Cancer Institute concluded that the scientific community needs to focus on finding the actual cause of chronic fatigue syndrome, and "stop wasting time and resources on the laboratory-derived virus known as XMRV". He added that "XMRV has nothing to do with prostate cancer".

By way of contrast, Dr. Mikovits remains the optimist, with patents still pending for the detection of XMRV seroconversion in several diseases.

The science in "Science" is what it is. Until another study is published. Pass the earplugs.

Until the first replication study is conducted, I'll continue to yawn, as I continue to campaign, as I continue to endure the illness ME. Surely until such time as the methods used by Lombardi et al are replicated, the results will be hard to replicate. I thought this was a central tenet of science.

I don't have the energy to scream. I would say to Dr Pathak that it would not be a waste of money to conduct a true replication study - it would be the first step.

Has any other illness had two retroviral findings dismissed over it's history (De Freitas in 1991 being the first)? And if science can't agree on the retroviral aspect, maybe they could agree that the psychiatric establishment have no place in researching this neurological/ immunological illness.

REPLICATION OF LOMBARDI 2009 STUDY NOW PLEASE - it's almost 2 years since this study was published. Basic science must require a true replication study.

Please keep an open mind and continue to write about XMRV. For those that have lived with the illness and the politics for decades, nothing would surprise us. Regards, UK sufferer

Until the first replication study is conducted, I'll continue to yawn, as I continue to campaign, as I continue to endure the illness ME. Surely until such time as the methods used by Lombardi et al are replicated, the results will be hard to replicate. I thought this was a central tenet of science.

I don't have the energy to scream. I would say to Dr Pathak that it would not be a waste of money to conduct a true replication study - it would be the first step.

Has any other illness had two retroviral findings dismissed over it's history (De Freitas in 1991 being the first)? And if science can't agree on the retroviral aspect, maybe they could agree that the psychiatric establishment have no place in researching this neurological/ immunological illness.

REPLICATION OF LOMBARDI 2009 STUDY NOW PLEASE - it's almost 2 years since this study was published. Basic science must require a true replication study.

Please keep an open mind and continue to write about XMRV. For those of us that have lived with the illness and the politics for decades, nothing would surprise us. Regards, UK Sufferer

Seriously? Biomedical research into the cause of chronic fatigue syndrome is really so boring to you? I would have thought that, finally, the illness receiving some proper research and attention was a very good thing. And surely this is what science is about: the discussion, the studies, the disagreement, the to-ing and fro-ing. Without this, we get nowhere. I also would have thought that less than two years of investigation into a possible retroviral cause of CFS was not a very long time to come to scientific consensus.

Dr. Borgini, you refer to the research about the possible cause of an incurable illness that leaves many of its victims bedbound for decades with the phrase "pass the earplugs." I have to believe that you are trying to be witty and falling flat. If you're not trying to be witty, are you really that callous? If the subject was Alzheimer's, Multiple Sclerosis, Parkinson's, autism, cancer, or any other illness, would you refer to a major breakthrough followed by contradictory studies with the phrase "pass the earplugs"?

After thoroughly examining your blog I would say that you suffer from a severe case of Tin Ear. For your sake, I hope it's curable.

I have had ME/CFS for decades. I hope you wish me a cure as well, and that you will follow the unfolding science with the interest it deserves.

It's dismaying that someone who has "devoted his career to treating, and training others to treat, a wide variety of illnesses that cause chronic pain and disability" would use his platform to belittle patients who have been suffering for years. It's sad, really. I would expect more sensitivity from someone with your qualifications.

Your blase attitude is disrespectful. How on earth would you expect ANY patient to have regard for your professional opinion after writing this? Surely your profession holds you to a higher standard? I am shocked that someone did not overstep your bad judgement and stop you from posting this to the blog. Don't you have editors ?